[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Fontinst modifications
- To: firstname.lastname@example.org
- Subject: Re: Fontinst modifications
- From: Ulrik Vieth <email@example.com>
- Date: Thu, 4 Jun 1998 12:01:35 +0200
- CC: firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com
- In-reply-to: <4510-Thu04Jun1998080710firstname.lastname@example.org> (messagefrom Sebastian Rahtz on Thu, 4 Jun 1998 08:07:10 +0100)
> Alan Jeffrey writes:
>> Since then Sebastian has effectively taken over maintainance of
>> fontinst. I think I'd prefer to formalize this state of affairs,
>> and hand it over to him. We should certainly get rid of v1.335,
>> which is very mouldy.
> um, my time for this is almost 0 minutes a week.
> I think that since Ulrik has (foolishly!) admitted he is .dtx-ing it
> all, we should ask him to officially produce fontinst 1.8, hopefully
> including Lar's interesting-sounding additions.
> lets get that straight, distributed, etc, before worrying about who
> is the future maintainer.
OK, I'll try to finish what I have been working on, and make it v1.8.
As for Lar's additions, they can go into v1.800, v1.801, v1.802, etc.
Once you have it all in .dtx format, you can easily add everybody's
favorite hacks enclosed in docstrip modules
and selectively choose to compile them in or leave them out.
> the docs need clearly moving to an obsolete-doc directory, unless
> they get updated.
If you're talking about the 1.335 docs, they certainly need revising,
but I don't think they are completely obsolete. The examples using
"0" encoded fonts instead of "8a" are clearly misleading and should be
replaced, but the summary of docstrip commands presumably can be kept
with just minor touching up.
Anyway, I thought that working on the docs was Rowland's job.